EOSM is late to the market, which means that to make any headway it needs to be a very compelling offering in order to get traction. Given Canon's current weakness in sensors and its decision to put a so-so AF system in the EOSM, I for one am not to excited to 'lock' myself into a system with just a few lenses. There is just no sense in doing that.

Despite having all Canon cameras, I ended up replacing my S90 by a Sony RX100. That camera is so good (size, lens, sensor, AF), that I'm now doubting whether the premise underlying the EOSM is viable at all. Rather than carrying interchangeable lenses, I could see myself carrying two RX100-type cameras with different lenses.

Yawn. If Canon would look to the RX1 for some inspiration, then I might consider it.

The RX1 is priced like a 5D III and has a fixed lens. The EOS M is - and will be - an interchangeable lens camera for the masses. The RX1 is nothing more than a marketing exercise. Takes good pictures, true, but for the price of a 6D or a D600 and a Sigma 35 1.4 you'll get equally good pictures for less money. And you'll be able to put other lenses on it. As well, full-frame sensor is absolutely unnecessary. Besides the fact that you can take gorgeous pictures with a crop-frame or 4/3 sensor, making the EOS M a full-frame camera will add to the bulk of the lenses as well as the camera, negating most of the advantages that mirrorless cameras have in the first place.The RX 1 has simply taken a fixed lens and welded it onto a box with a sensor. And, like the EOS M, it has no viewfinder. The entire rig will have to be redesigned to allow it to be an interchangeable lens camera. It's already ridiculously expensive. Making it interchangeable will sky-rocket the cost. The RX 1 is a foolish model to emulate.

The main thing I'd want if I were going to by an M is a standard zoom that folds entirely inside the body when not in use. Since I don't see that happening, I can't see this system ever becoming interesting.

Not likely to happen, the laws of physics are against it.

Interesting that they were able to do it with dozens of compact film cameras, that were necessarily full-frame and also carried a film transport mechanism!

I won't echo everyone's calls for a FF sensor. EOS-M means the M mount, which means crop. Strongly recommend you don't hold your breath for an FF change for years from Canon, b/c that's how long it will take for them to build up a collection of EF-M lenses.

And even if they did make the FF mirrorless that many want, presumably taking native EF glass, it will be huuuuge -- as in comically large in size. One understands (though does not necessarily agree) why Sony went with a fixed lens on the RX1 -- it makes it smaller.

What is the market for this kind of cameras? Frankly here in Europe I don't see a real demand for relatively "entry level" mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses. The people Canon aims this kind of camera to are usually happy with some fixed lens one with a decent zoom lens, which spares them the need to rummage inside a bag to get another lens and change it - and get also a bag to store lenses within. The Powershot G series covers that market already pretty well. IMHO the buyer of such cameras are those looking for something smaller/lighter than a DSLR to carry around as often as possible, with almost the same power. But they need a more powerful camera than the actual M is. If Canon delivers something with a good viewfinder - but please, not a "removable" one, such kind of cameras needs to be "simple" and fast to use - and a decent lens lineup I'll get one. I don't care if it is full frame or APS-C or whatever - I'll judge the versatility and image quality.

What is the market for this kind of cameras? Frankly here in Europe I don't see a real demand for relatively "entry level" mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses. The people Canon aims this kind of camera to are usually happy with some fixed lens one with a decent zoom lens, which spares them the need to rummage inside a bag to get another lens and change it - and get also a bag to store lenses within. The Powershot G series covers that market already pretty well. IMHO the buyer of such cameras are those looking for something smaller/lighter than a DSLR to carry around as often as possible, with almost the same power. But they need a more powerful camera than the actual M is. If Canon delivers something with a good viewfinder - but please, not a "removable" one, such kind of cameras needs to be "simple" and fast to use - and a decent lens lineup I'll get one. I don't care if it is full frame or APS-C or whatever - I'll judge the versatility and image quality.

Unlike most people here, I've actually shot with an EOS M, both stills and video. While the autofocus for stills is barely adequate - I never use AF for video anyway - image quality is excellent. The M just needs a few usability tweaks, better AF and an expanded suite of lenses and, for those who actually take pictures rather than look at test charts and spec sheets, it will be a winner. It will never replace my DSLRs but as a light-weight, walk-around rig it has great potential. I'll be ordering the next model as soon as it's announced.

Both Canon and Nikon are living in the past -- building cameras for markets that don't exist anymore.

There is NO demand for compact P&S and none for step-up cameras. They have been replaced by smart-phones.

There IS a demand for small/light high-end cameras with a good selection of lenses. So what does Canon deliver An under-featured and over-priced EOS M. Soon to be joined by another under-featured camera priced higher than the Sony NEX-6. WTF is going on